Is Football Inherently Flawed?

Off Topic
41

Here’s the thing about the choice that football players make about taking the field and engaging in a sport as innately dangerous as football. If they knowingly accept the risk, then why should the NFL put so much of its revenue into retired players’ pensions in order to more appropriately finance their massive health issues later in life?

And if the NFL IS going to increase the funding of these pensions, then why shouldn’t the NFL be able to change the rules around to better protect the players?

Also, I would argue that a lot of players do NOT understand the inherent risk they undertake when they play football. A lot of the connections between concussions and the early onset of dementia/Alzheimer’s are fairly new discoveries.

42

[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
And finally here’s the crazy ass new Schutt helmet where the mask anchors over top of the ear hole in order to provide an even bigger energy dispersion? Who knows.

The helmet I wore in High school and beyond was more like the red Adams above, it was a maxpro with an airbladder in it. DJHT is right though, were I even offered a different piece of gear I’d have a hard time picking something new.[/quote]

The problem with the improved technology in helmets is that people are just going to hit harder now that they feel safer. Compare rugby and football. If you took shoulder pads and helmets away from football, i’m sure concussions would be drastically reduced, despite that fact that protective equipment was taken away. And no i am not arguing that they should take away pads from football

43


Let’s just put all the players in giant sumo suits.

44

[quote]TD54 wrote:

[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
And finally here’s the crazy ass new Schutt helmet where the mask anchors over top of the ear hole in order to provide an even bigger energy dispersion? Who knows.

The helmet I wore in High school and beyond was more like the red Adams above, it was a maxpro with an airbladder in it. DJHT is right though, were I even offered a different piece of gear I’d have a hard time picking something new.[/quote]

The problem with the improved technology in helmets is that people are just going to hit harder now that they feel safer. Compare rugby and football. If you took shoulder pads and helmets away from football, i’m sure concussions would be drastically reduced, despite that fact that protective equipment was taken away. And no i am not arguing that they should take away pads from football[/quote]

I see what you mean, 100%.

But you’d also have to change the entire strategy of moving down the field in order to reduce concussion frequency, I believe. No more forward passes, no more kickoffs where players are trucking light speed at each other, etc. I’ve had more than a couple football related injuries, including a couple concussions, but my worst concussion came from catching a knee right in the ear during a pickup game after work wearing no pads. Probably because I was used to wearing a helmet and let myself be in a risky situation.

Take the pads and helmets away from todays players and still have the same rules, guys will end up dead.

Oh, and Quad-flex… Not sure why but I don’t dig that screencap if that’s the dude that died last night. Might be my opinion exclusively, but it’s poor form.

45

[quote]eeu743 wrote:
Take away the pads and the helmets and the number of concussions will go down pretty quick. I know it’s a part of the game now and I’m not REALLY suggesting it, but it’s true. I played rugby, and you hardly ever saw a concussion or even a serious injury. Not saying it never happens, but it’s not common. Mostly just dinged up a little bit. You’re a lot more careful about how you hit someone when you don’t have anything to protect you.[/quote]
I beg to differ. I saw plenty of concussions in 8 years of rugby (trainings and games saw “mild” concussions at least fortnightly, and someone got cleaned up properly at least monthly), a few shoulder dislocations, and 5 cases where an ambulance came on the field and take a player away due to a suspected neck injury.
I’ve been concussed myself a few times from impact, or a knee to the temple in a ruck or maul going down.

It’s not simply about the gear, it’s about how you lead in to the tackle and the mentality of the players involved. Until you start penalising players for behaviour which increases the likelyhood of concussion, and mandating modern helmets and pads which are shown to reduce the risk, then it’ll continue.
You don’t become a pro without wanting to push the limits of the rules, or having a certain disregard for your body.

46

[quote]QuadasarusFlex wrote:

[quote]Rockscar wrote:

  1. Baseball…someone might fall out of the stands or a player may get hit with a ball

[/quote]
Speaking of which.[/quote]

No opinions, that IS poor taste.

47

[quote]smokotime wrote:

[quote]eeu743 wrote:
Take away the pads and the helmets and the number of concussions will go down pretty quick. I know it’s a part of the game now and I’m not REALLY suggesting it, but it’s true. I played rugby, and you hardly ever saw a concussion or even a serious injury. Not saying it never happens, but it’s not common. Mostly just dinged up a little bit. You’re a lot more careful about how you hit someone when you don’t have anything to protect you.[/quote]
I beg to differ. I saw plenty of concussions in 8 years of rugby (trainings and games saw “mild” concussions at least fortnightly, and someone got cleaned up properly at least monthly), a few shoulder dislocations, and 5 cases where an ambulance came on the field and take a player away due to a suspected neck injury.
I’ve been concussed myself a few times from impact, or a knee to the temple in a ruck or maul going down.

It’s not simply about the gear, it’s about how you lead in to the tackle and the mentality of the players involved. Until you start penalising players for behaviour which increases the likelyhood of concussion, and mandating modern helmets and pads which are shown to reduce the risk, then it’ll continue.
You don’t become a pro without wanting to push the limits of the rules, or having a certain disregard for your body.[/quote]

I’m not saying it never happens, and trust me I’ve seen some pretty bad injuries too. One of my teammates dislocated his HIP during my first ever game lol. I don’t know statistics so I won’t claim anything to be factual, I just feel like there are a TON of concussions in football, and like you said, you see maybe one guy get a major concussion every month playing rugby. I can only think of one player on my team who ever had an obvious concussion, and like you said, it was about how he played. He was always trying to light people up and didn’t practice good form, and guess what, HE got concussed.

I just think the likelihood of serious brain damage is decreased when you have to actually take steps to prevent getting yourself killed when making a tackle.

48

I think I’m echoing a ton of the statements already expressed, but I don’t think the game needs changed or revamped or anything.

By the time I was 16 I had concussions and broken fingers and a toe, and crushed a vertebrae. Would I do it over again? Yes. Did I know this was happening to me before it happened? No. I loved the game, and still play flag football (because I dont really have time to go out and make the time to be in an actual pad-league.)

I have worn all three of those helmets you just showed… the old one for the first two years, one of those Schutt (we called them ‘DNAs’) and the Riddell (Revolution) helmets… and I came from a high school with a graduating class of 57. In small town Arkansas. If we had access to them, you better believe they are available everywhere, it’s just a matter of priorities. As a little skinny high school player, I used to spear people, blindside tackle people, hit the knees, anything and everything to make the play. And you better believe that if I weren’t 130 pounds but 230, I would have hurt more people… the helmet doesn’t make you a impervious to injuries, just to the off chance of getting a concussion in certain types of collisions.

There are a lot of cliches that fit but ‘it’s not a game it’s a lifestyle’ seems to fit… if you’re an elite level athlete your mindset is undoubtedly different than the rest of us average joes. And I betcha a shiny nickel none of those players feel the same kind of concern that you guys do… to them it’s a job, it’s their life, it’s not a game… they just go out and do their thing. Making a stadium erupt is an awesome feeling (There are few feelings better than watching the home crowd erupt after a huge open field tackle). I don’t see the game changing unless more and more liberals decide how unsafe it is to hit someone. Most of them haven’t played the game and are just going off the statistics on a page.

49

Remove the facemask.

Also,IMHO, there are football players and then there are freakish athletes. Most NFLers are oversized. Compare Wes Welker/Mark Clayton(dolphins)/Doug Flutie to any random first-round physical-specimen receiver/DL bust. Great careers despite no one wanting them because they were too small.

Jamarcus Russell comes to mind: Great athletic ability. Huge dude. Not a football player. IF you can find the rare combination of both, then you’re gold. But I think too much emphasis is placed on body weight and height in modern football(and the combine–think Mike Mamula). Good players who are normal-sized often cannot stand the pounding of guys who get by on strength and size alone, and only last a season or two, if that long.

50

Realistically there will always be injuries in Football, I think it’s just a bigger issue now that we know what’s causing the brain damage and we can see a concussion during the game then on ESPN and Youtube. The injuries get a lot of exposure and a casual fans sitting down to watch a game aren’t going to want to see the reality of hard hitting Football. I don’t think there’s much to do beyond mandating helmets that offer the most protection against brain trauma and penalizing the stupidity that’s a well conditioned athlete running full speed and launching himself headfirst at a defenseless receiver’s helmet.

51

[quote]someguyyy wrote:
I think I’m echoing a ton of the statements already expressed, but I don’t think the game needs changed or revamped or anything.

By the time I was 16 I had concussions and broken fingers and a toe, and crushed a vertebrae. Would I do it over again? Yes. Did I know this was happening to me before it happened? No. I loved the game, and still play flag football (because I dont really have time to go out and make the time to be in an actual pad-league.)

I have worn all three of those helmets you just showed… the old one for the first two years, one of those Schutt (we called them ‘DNAs’) and the Riddell (Revolution) helmets… and I came from a high school with a graduating class of 57. In small town Arkansas. If we had access to them, you better believe they are available everywhere, it’s just a matter of priorities. As a little skinny high school player, I used to spear people, blindside tackle people, hit the knees, anything and everything to make the play. And you better believe that if I weren’t 130 pounds but 230, I would have hurt more people… the helmet doesn’t make you a impervious to injuries, just to the off chance of getting a concussion in certain types of collisions.

There are a lot of cliches that fit but ‘it’s not a game it’s a lifestyle’ seems to fit… if you’re an elite level athlete your mindset is undoubtedly different than the rest of us average joes. And I betcha a shiny nickel none of those players feel the same kind of concern that you guys do… to them it’s a job, it’s their life, it’s not a game… they just go out and do their thing. Making a stadium erupt is an awesome feeling (There are few feelings better than watching the home crowd erupt after a huge open field tackle). I don’t see the game changing unless more and more liberals decide how unsafe it is to hit someone. Most of them haven’t played the game and are just going off the statistics on a page.[/quote]

You have no fucking clue what you’re talking about. A huge amount of the concern over the growing number of head injuries is from the players themselves. They aren’t donating their brains because they don’t give a fuck. “More and more liberals”? I laugh.

This isn’t about politics, but clearly you function better when you can erroneously reduce an argument down to terms you’re more comfortable with, namely the us vs. them mentality. A lot of the concern is coming from former players whose lives are deteriorating in quality due to the cumulative effect of being repeatedly hit in the head. Most of them are able to further quantify their concerns with empirical evidence that is shedding new light on the severity of repeated concussions.

I’ll use Steve Young as an example. NO ONE can say that motherfucker wasn’t a tough sonofabitch, yet he retired when he was still performing at a Pro Bowl level because of concern over multiple concussions. You are an absolute irrelevancy as far as this thread goes if you don’t think that A LOT of players are concerned about their quality of life after they’re done playing.

And that’s really my whole point here with this thread. With the increasing knowledge people are gaining thanks to intensive research about the effects of concussions, will football players themselves want to take that risk? Generally, football players are incredible athletes and many of them are probably good enough to excel at any sport if they played something other than football from an early stage. I played football with and against Tully Banta-Cain from the Patriots when we were growing up and I also played baseball with him. I can tell you right now that he was a good enough athlete to have gone pro in baseball if he had stuck with it instead of football. I’m sure the same holds true for a lot of other players in the NFL right now.

Is the NFL going to see a slow drain of talent due to the increasing concern that parents like the BodyGuard may have about their children’s health and safety?

52

[quote]eeu743 wrote:

[quote]QuadasarusFlex wrote:

[quote]Rockscar wrote:

  1. Baseball…someone might fall out of the stands or a player may get hit with a ball

[/quote]
Speaking of which.[/quote]

No opinions, that IS poor taste.[/quote]

Seriously, come on man

53

I wonder what the difference in rate and severity of head injuries is when comparing American football to rugby.
Anyone know?

54

NFL is going down hill. The big hits are over, and the rules are so vague. Any good hit that used to be awesome is now a 15yd penalty, huge fine and probably a suspension.

just had to put this one in.

55

No.

Human fascination with violence goes back many years ago, and this is just one of several versions of modern day gladiator type events. People love boxing, hockey, rugby, and yes football for this very reason. I think it taps into a primal urge, whether it’s watching or participating, that scary moment where you are locked into the TV screen to see what happens next.

FWIW, the NFL LOVES putting these type of knock-your-block-off kinda of hits for highlight reels. I find it comedic irony to fine them for these hits, yet use them to sell on NFL videos.

When there is money to be made (or lost) from this type of media, it won’t change. With larger, faster players comes bigger paychecks, and fatter contracts. I doubt you will see anything to slow down these collisions.

In film rooms and meetings, coaches will always tell you that if you are going to get flagged for “personal foul” or “unsportsmanlike conduct”, make it worth it. Trust me, coaches could care less, because you have defensive players who will intentionally try to take out the star QB, WR, or RB. You have guys who intentionally leg-whip linemen, where the ONLY use for that technique is to blow out a knee.

56

[quote]MattyG35 wrote:
I wonder what the difference in rate and severity of head injuries is when comparing American football to rugby.
Anyone know?[/quote]

I don’t think they are similar enough to compare, the rules regarding tackling are vastly different for a start, and the outcome of a tackle is different. Rugby League would be a closer comparison.

57

[quote]BradTGIF wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
I think the idea of regression in sports is laughable…because the only people who really want this either hate sports or they happen to be politicians who want the vote of the average soccer mom who is scared her son will lose his head playing after school flag football.

Solution?

Allow implants and steroids.

Head implants and more sophisticated head gear will decrease concussions and who wouldn’t tune in to see 2020’s version of a running back with a bionic arm who is all of 5’10" but weighs a solid 310lbs with abs?

[/quote]

Please don’t lump me in with the soccer mom crowd or the pro-regression in sports crowd. My children will never play soccer, no matter what.

But I disagree about your statement regarding who wants to see this happen. Sure, soccer moms and politicians with nothing better to do want to see changes, but so do A LOT of current and former players. I don’t think they necessarily want to see the game watered down, but they do want to see improvements made in the ability to prevent and treat concussions, which is why a lot of former and current players are donating their brains to medical studies addressing these issues.

My point is, or my question is, is it really possible to alleviate these concerns in a satisfactory manner without “watering down” the game?[/quote]

The problem with the vein this discussion is already heading is that it’s not limited to a “concussion” problem. It’s a head contact problem. Repeated blows to the head, even those that do not produce a concussion, can lead to brain damage. What one person can tolerate, the next may not. While one sufficient blow may result in brain damage to one person, another may be able to tolerate many more before suffering damage.

I guess this makes me a soccer mom because I will definitely steer my son to basketball, baseball, track, wrestling, etc. [/quote]

How old is your son?

Has there been consideration as to him, at say 10 years old absolutely BEGGING you to play football?

I have a 10 month old son, and I’m curious.

I played football through high school then played full contact for a few years in the Military. I think I’m going to find it difficult be “hands off” and let him decide what he wants to do because I know my tendency is going to be for me to steer him in that direction since that what I know and what I love. Know what I mean? His mom and I already decided to not let him suit up for full contact until he’s in 8th grade. We’ll see.

I don’t want to hyjack this thread into a fathering debate, just curious.
[/quote]

My youngest son is 5. The other two are “grown”. He has mentioned football, among some other sports. I will not be letting him play football. And I am not generally overprotective. I’ll just steer him to other sports. I played basketball and I was “hands off” with my older two boys, not even steering them to basketball. They played what they wished to play (I didn’t want to be THAT ex-sports star dad, or THAT dad in general). In fact, my middle son played some high school football. But I didn’t know then what I know now.

58

[quote]DBCooper wrote:
Here’s the thing about the choice that football players make about taking the field and engaging in a sport as innately dangerous as football. If they knowingly accept the risk, then why should the NFL put so much of its revenue into retired players’ pensions in order to more appropriately finance their massive health issues later in life?

And if the NFL IS going to increase the funding of these pensions, then why shouldn’t the NFL be able to change the rules around to better protect the players?

Also, I would argue that a lot of players do NOT understand the inherent risk they undertake when they play football. A lot of the connections between concussions and the early onset of dementia/Alzheimer’s are fairly new discoveries. [/quote]

They are only beginning to understand the risk. This issue will not go away. Like I said in an earlier post, you have young players already with brain damage. And to whoever the poster that stated they “makes lots of money”…bullshit. First, NFL contracts are not guaranteed. The average NFL career is very short. It’s not nearly enough money to “trade” for brain damage, IF the players understood the risk. Given that they are just starting to understand the risk, there can be no reasonable conscious “bargain” for money v. health. Football players pretty much count on being walking cripples later in life, not forgetting where they live and literally losing their minds.

59


Im late to the party… the answer is ofc ‘yes’

60

just turn it into rugby already

no pads, arm tackles, eye gouging, and still big dudes who can kick the shit out of most of the population destroying each other for our amusement